.

.
Library of Professor Richard A. Macksey in Baltimore

POSTS BY SUBJECT

Labels

Sunday, August 10, 2014

911 - Breakthroughs Towards Attaining A Complete Understanding of the Nuking of the WTC on 9/11, and its China Syndrome Aftermath: Part II

Breakthroughs Towards Attaining A Complete Understanding of the Nuking of the WTC on 9/11, and its China Syndrome Aftermath: Part II

by The Anonymous Physicist

This is part of my continuing efforts to decipher, and expose, the details of the American regime’s nuking of the WTC on 9/11/01, and the China Syndrome aftermath of high heat emitting, radioactive/fissioning fragments at, and under, the WTC. As I have detailed herein (see the archived URL’s noted at the bottom), the China Syndrome documentation includes massive evidence of high temperatures, melted boots, flowing molten metal, and much more. Inherent in this, was the perpetrators’ crucial need to keep the nuking of the WTC, and the China Syndrome aftermath, hidden from Americans (and the world.)

Now any nuke that might be significantly larger than expected, and thus might blow through a building, and be videotaped, had to be prevented, as the nuclear op would be clear to all. Now you might think that if a larger nuke than expected became visible, the regime would just say that Osama bin Laden (aka Tim Osman of the CIA) had obtained nukes after all. But they couldn’t, because they had already put out the (CGI) “plane hits”, and it is not plausible that anyone would go to all the trouble of hijacking planes, and “flying them into the towers”, if they had already planted nukes therein! The perps would lose their coveted “plausible deniability.” So it was crucial to use nukes that might be underpowered, or even fizzle (as this could be [and was] corrected later); and not to use nukes that might have a larger yield than predicted. And better to have many smaller ones— redundancy— which could be corrected as needed— as was WTC7. I have stated that the bogus “towers are leaning,” said on the air by the regime’s intel operators/”reporters” was related to the fall-back position of using larger nukes in the sub-basement of the towers— which would not be visible-- to knock the towers over, if the intricate top to bottom scenario, with many smaller nukes, fizzled completely.

In more detail, uncertainty in the lower boundary of destructive nuclear yield, was far more tolerable, than uncertainty was, in the upper boundary of yield. The former is OK, as even fizzling (insufficient yield) could be, and was, “corrected” later— a la WTC7. http://covertoperations.blogspot.com/2007/09/breakthroughs-toward-attaining-complete.html
How might this relate to the fission vs. fusion issue? Perhaps either fusion bombs cannot be made with very low yield-- or perhaps more likely-- a very low yield cannot be guaranteed for fusion devices, as well as it can be for fission devices. Note the Castle Bravo H-Bomb test of March 1, 1954, where “The 15 megaton [thermonuclear] bomb delivered a force far more powerful than expected”. This leads me to the “official” tritium finding— and release-- from the USGS (aka the UCal/Berkeley/Livermore) study. See also William Tahil’s analysis of this, and his perhaps, crucial findings and analysis of levels found of Strontium, Barium, and other elements, of the fissioning of Uranium or Plutonium.

Now regarding the tritium, there are three possibilities:
1. Tritium was used as a booster in fission nukes at the WTC, and/or
2. Tritium was used in fusion nukes at the WTC, or
3. The Tritium finding is bogus, a straw man.

Now you might ask why would the federal regime release data that might indicate the use of a fusion device at the WTC? Precisely because of the existence of the China Syndrome aftermath! And stating there was tritium could be a straw man, in the sense that 911 researchers would be diverted into believing that fusion (only) devices were used— including the so-called, hypothetical “pure fusion” nukes, and therefore there could be no China Syndrome aftermath, as that requires fissioning fragments. (At the same time, of course, different intel assets would claim that the tritium finding doesn’t mean anything.) So the pure fusion debate could be a red herring. Recall earlier, I have written that whenever the federal regime releases something that seems very damaging, it will likely turn out that the truth is far worse, and is being hidden. The bottom line is that the federal regime could have easily prevented the release of the tritium finding, if it were genuine. All they had to do is to claim the usual “national security” excuse to censor anything. Recall I have asserted, and demonstrated, that the 2nd AVIRIS WTC ground temperature data is false, as well as the seismic records. Anything that indicated the China Syndrome has been particularly censored.

Anything and everything coming from the federal regime must never be taken on face value. Indeed, statistically, one would be better off assuming any statement, assertion, or data regarding any very important issue, is a lie. The regime knew from the outset that the China Syndrome had begun. This was either from knowing this as WTC destruction happened, or from its intel assets on the ground, or from satellites or planes high overhead— assaying heat or radiation spectra. The feds then informed their stooge/mayor, Giuliani, who immediately ordered the trucking in and out of sand/earth, and hosing down of the grounds, to lower the radiation levels.

I find it fascinating that one of the proponents of the nuclear WTC hypothesis repeatedly cites the tritium finding, but has never once written the words, “China Syndrome.” We must also be aware of how the regime easily keeps these words from being mentioned in the MSM, and had its assets waiting in the wings with their hangouts to hide this. I refer again to the thermite and “DEW” hangouts. The thermite physicist ludicrously claims that thermite would maintain molten metal temperatures for months. While the DEW engineer claims that each time the firemen/responders hosed down the very hot rubble pile, and steam (photographed) and hissing sounds were emitted, that instead “cold molecular dissociation clouds” appeared, or the latest “New Physics” gibberish (it will never end: the sign of an intel op)-- the “Hutchison effect.”

So in trying to obtain a complete understanding of the nuking of the WTC on 9/11, and the China Syndrome aftermath, I can state the following. There is a good probability that numerous low yield (mini- or micro-nuclear) fission bombs were used. There is the possibility that the tritium “finding”, that was released by the govt, may be a straw man to lead researchers to the red herring of “pure fusion”, and away from the evidence of the China Syndrome. In all likelihood, the regime has kept proof of radiation release at the WTC during demolition, and the later China Syndrome from public release. The ludicrous hangouts of thermite and DEW were created to hide the China Syndrome, and the nuking.

Some of the people of New York City have learned well the nature of their regime, and have bought Geiger counters (which are of limited use). The regime knows this, and is trying to ban the possession of Geiger Counters by the citizenry. So the citizens are trying to determine directly for themselves if they will be hit with any more nukings of their city. What possible reason would the regime have for denying them this right— other than the obvious, nefarious one? The current NYC stooge/mayor Bloomberg’s own Police “counter-terrorism deputy commissioner,” R.A. Falkenrath, makes it clear with his own words from the last URL. The restriction is so that “we know where these detectors are located…” Translation: They want to make sure that there will be no WORKING Geiger detectors nearby at the time the regime does its next nuking of NYC. Those of you who understand all that I have written here, will realize that “counter-terrorism experts” like former “reporter” John Miller that I exposed herein, are likely long term deep undercover intel “assets.” They are the terrorists themselves, and/or working directly for the regime’s terrorists who have done, and will do, the next nuking— or other use of a WMD against the citizenry.

But the people are obviously catching on. And I hope with my articles herein, that we can see more and more clearly exactly what they did on 9/11, and its aftermath. Please post this and my archived articles on the nuking of the WTC, and the China Syndrome aftermath at wtcdemolition.blogspot.com and wtc-chinasyndrome.blogspot.com at all forums and blogs. And tell your friends and neighbors. The life you save may be your own. While this mass murdering, terrorist regime may desire to ban Geiger counters, and guns, the people have learned that the way to counter this is for everyone to get them now, and never give them up.

911 - Basement Nukes and Top-Down Demolition

Basement Nukes and Top-Down Demolition

Various people have suggested that the basement of the WTC was blown with high explosives (even nuked) prior to, and/or concomitant with, the top-down demolition that was performed to obliterate the towers.

I have always been somewhat unsure of this idea for the simple reason that it wasn't clear to me how exactly basement bombs/nukes fit in with the top-down demolition-- plus there was the fact that during the demolitions, part of the inner cores for each tower remained standing after the initial demolition phase.

However, this post from 911blogger provides more evidence for explosions at the base of the tower concomitant with demolition.

Thinking about this some more, I have an idea for how basement bombs would have been used.

Here we see the remnants of tower one-- and clearly there is a section of the core remaining in the center of the blasted out debris:

(TOWER 1 --click to enlarge; you can see the people better to give scale)

The key here is that IN FACT, only PART of the core is remaining-- what looks like only the very center of the core-- perhaps a dozen columns at most.

The core was made of 47 absolutely MASSIVE columns-- just think that the core columns that would make up the core at the base of the tower carried much of the weight of those huge towers above. Clearly, most of these massive columns have been blown away from their original location. Note, it's not like there is debris is covering these columns-- the columns have either been knocked/blown away or they have been blown to pieces. Given that the very center core columns survived the "onslaught" (see the picture), it is not clear why the just as strong outer core columns wouldn't survive-- unless they were literally blown away at the base.

What seems plausible-- even likely-- is that several basement nukes took out the core columns at the sides or corners of the core section. A partial dismemberment of the core could conceivably facilitate a top-down collapse by taking away some of the supports between the floors and the core. This would give explosive devices on the upper floors an easier time in peeling the outer walls from the core remnant. Which is really what happened-- the outer walls peeled away from the tower from top to bottom, in an explosive sequence-- leaving an inner core remnant that then must have been blown from below from the lower floors to leave the small column remnants seen in the picture above.

But the key here is that basement bombs-- almost certainly nukes-- would be used to take out PART OF THE CORE specifically to facilitate the top-down collapse.

911 - Proof of the Existence of Mini-Nukes and Micro-Nukes

Proof of the Existence of Mini-Nukes and Micro-Nukes

From the Anonymous Physicist

More and more people are realizing that other theories proposed could not have destroyed the WTC, and are limited hangouts. As more people realize that the WTC was likely demolished via small nuclear bombs (likely with subsidiary conventional explosives), some are now claiming that milli-nukes (mini-nukes), or micro-nukes don’t even exist. Spooked and I have addressed this issue before. Here first is proof of the “Nuclear rifle” from the 1950’s, no less.

The .01 kiloton (kt) TNT equivalent is about 1/1000th of the Hiroshima (20KT) blast. And here is a govt scientist, Peter Leitner, PhD, speaking to a Congressional Committee, in 1998. This is proof of nuclear bombs down into the range of “several pounds of TNT.” He stated, “These experiments involve the ACTUAL TESTING of extremely low-yield fission devices (as low as the equivalent of several pounds of TNT) within a confined environment.” Several pounds of TNT is equivalent to about 1/10,000,000th (one ten millionth) of the Hiroshima blast. Thus the U.S. Govt admitted having micro-nukes, and beyond in 1998. Note that this public admission stated that the testing was done “in a controlled environment.”

Clearly, the gov't has had milli-nukes and micro-nukes for some time

911 - Brief Evidence of Nuclear bombs used at the WTC on 9/11/01

Brief Evidence of Nuclear bombs used at the WTC on 9/11/01

From the Anonymous Physicist, extracted from here.

-- the proven existence of mini-nukes and micro-nukes

-- massive outward explosions as seen in videos of the towers' "collapses"

-- the vaporization of a large steel press in the WTC basement

-- the wrinkling into “foil” of a steel/concrete door

-- the spherical blast wave destruction

-- the “nuclear meteorite” (a chunk of WTC debris with 4 floors fused together)

-- the feeling of heat without fire of numerous witnesses

-- the burned or hanging skin (Felipe David), without fire, like so many Hiroshima victims

-- the responders’ teeth later falling out (Tartaglia), like numerous American Army A-Bomb test veterans/victims

-- the missing, presumably vaporized, building contents

-- the missing, presumably vaporized 1157 people, unaccounted for at Ground Zero

-- the massive evidence of the China Syndrome of resultant nuclear reacting fragments causing the very high heat and molten steel witnessed (and photographed) by so many firefighter and responders at least six months after 9/11

-- the clothing discarding from rescue workers

-- the decontamination procedures of rescue workers

-- EMT Ondrovic’s account of Electromagnetic Pulse and instantaneous resultant car fire, and the door exploding into her as WTC 5,6, were being exploded from within, near her (explained here)

-- the micro- or nano-fine particle debris/dust size

-- much more, all indicate the federal regime set off numerous mini-nuclear bombs in the WTC on 9/11.



The witnesses for nukes that my articles have cited, included:

-- numerous WTC workers, including Felipe David,

-- numerous firefighters, including Bronx firefighter Joe O’Toole

-- EMT worker Patricia Ondrovic

-- numerous first responders, including Sgt. Matthew Tartaglia

-- WTC stationary engineer Pecoraro

-- fire engineering professor Dr. Barnett

-- top British and American Structural Engineers including Keith Eaton, PhD who were shown “secret” molten steel photos denied to the rest of us

-- Leslie E. Robertson, {American] Structural Engineer (and partial designer of WTC)

-- Kenneth Holden NYC Commissioner

-- Thomas von Essen, NYC Fire Commissioner

-- policeman: many (or the vast majority of the 503 who were found)

-- other on-scene witnesses have—- for the moment—likely have been silenced, as detailed herein—- which is witness tampering, and worse.



Scientific data have also been cited, including —

-- AVIRIS,

-- LIDAR,

-- seismic readings before “collapse”,

-- Tritium finding (UCAL/Berkeley, and subsequent Tahil study)

-- the now exploding number of “rare” CANCERS among responders, including thyroid, leukemia, and lymph cancer—all common among radiation victims

911 - More On the Immediate and Continous Radiation Lowering, and Shielding, Techniques Used at the WTC, after 9/11

More On the Immediate and Continous Radiation Lowering, and Shielding, Techniques Used at the WTC, after 9/11

by The Anonymous Physicist

Recall I have stated that the acts of trucking in (and out) of sand/earth, that began the very morning after 9/11, were likely done to lower the radiation levels at the WTC. I have hypothesized that Mayor Giuliani got the word from the federal perps to do this after the perps knew of the radiation/China Syndrome at “Ground Zero.” The perps knew this because they knew the types of nukes they had used, and had either agents on the ground assaying radiation levels, or had planes or satellites doing this from above. Hosing down the rubble pile with water also began as soon as they got the trucks and crews down there to this. This continued for months, as the photographic evidence clearly indicates.
Now I would like to present to you some corroboration that these two methods are used to lower radiation levels, and /or act as shielding, for people in the vicinity of nuclear radiation.
The Safety Handbook of the Alberta (Canada) Forest Products Association describes what to do in case of various emergencies. In the case of radiation exposure, it says for Shielding: Use shielding between yourself and the source of radiation. Equipment, concrete blocks, and PILES OF DIRT OR GRAVEL often provide makeshift shielding.” http://www.albertaforestproducts.ca/document_library/PPSOHandbook2004.pdf As Judy Wood’s site indicated (for incorrect reasons, of course) http://drjudywood.com/articles/dirt/dirt3.html#bucketbrigade trucks began carrying sand/earth in—and out—of the WTC the next morning. Carrying away the sand/earth may have had the same purpose as selling the WTC steel to China did—to hide the radioactive evidence.
Wiki has several articles that are relevant here too. First this article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_shielding“ states how paper and water can shield people from radiation: “Alpha radiation is the easiest to shield, because the very massive alpha particles can be stopped even with a leaf of paper. Beta radiation (electrons) is more difficult… shielding must be accomplished with low density materials, e.g. plastic, wood, WATER or acrylic glass.”
The importance of shielding from beta radiation emitted by fissile material is indicated in another wiki article here http://en.wikipediaorg/wiki/Nuclear_fission “Most nuclear fuels undergo spontaneous fission only very slowly, decaying mainly via an alpha/beta decay…. Fission products tend to be beta emitters…”
The following source http://moorcat.com/pragmatic_revolt/2006/04/20/nuclear-power-101/ appears to be written by someone well familiar with the ins and outs of nuclear reactors, and an almost rabid proponent of them—- which I am not. He states how well water can reduce radiation levels in a nuclear reactor: “24 inches of water reduces radiation by a factor of 10 -- therefore it is called a tenth thickness…”
The photos and text from Joel Meyerowitz’ book indicate that the water hosing down of the rubble pile was a massive, continuous effort for months. I would add that water hosing, and the subsequent steam seen emitted many times, also carried away heat as well as lowered radiation. The water’s temperature is raised, and then more energy is used up in the conversion to steam—very much like what happens in a nuclear reactor.
Now these sand/earth and water treatments were of limited use against the fissioning fragments at the bottom of the rubble pile, and in the sub-basement areas of the towers and WTC7. But here distance and inaccessibility acted as shielding for the vast majority of the responders. Only a few were allowed access to the basement areas, it is known. So it is clear that until carted away, the radioactive fission fragments at the WTC (aka the China Syndrome)--causing the great heat in the rubble pile (for threee months), and the even greater temperatures, and flowing molten metal up to six months, after 9/11, underneath the towers and WTC7--had continuous radiation-lowering, and shielding, methods applied to them.
Undoubtedly even more cancers and radiation sicknesses would have resulted among responders, and the local inhabitants, if these sand/earth, and water, measures were not undertaken. These methods lowered the radiation exposure to responders, they provided “makeshift shielding, ” and they also carried away heat. I am not stating this was done out of any concern for the responders, or New York metro area inhabitants; but rather to try to hide the nuking of the WTC, and the China Syndrome aftermath. But the evidence of all that can be found in the archived articles at wtcdemolition.blogspot.com and wtc-chinasyndromeblogspot.com.
What we should never forget, at this point, is what was learned in the long-term studies of Hiroshima and Nagasaki survivors http://www.ehponline.org/members/2006/9113/9113.html. It took decades for many survivors of those nukes to get cancer or other illnesses. The already known 400 (as of 2006) blood, lymph and thyroid cancers—all common among people exposed to radiation--among 911 responders is likely, and sadly, a drop in the bucket, compared to what may be coming. And, as far as I know, studies to see if there has been an increase of cancer, and/or other immune disorders, among the millions of New York metro inhabitants, since 9/11/01, have not been undertaken.
Bookmark and Share

911 - Breakthrough: The Story Of Cathy T, & The Large Earthquake That Was Felt One Mile Away When WTC1 Was “Hit”!

Breakthrough: The Story Of Cathy T, & The Large Earthquake That Was Felt One Mile Away When WTC1 Was “Hit”!

By The Anonymous Physicist

Cathy T. who lives, and works, in her apartment, which is about one mile north of the WTC, has this breaking story. Furthermore, the following events were witnessed by two people present with Cathy during these occurrences. Cathy recalls these events occurred between 8:30 and 9 A.M. on 9/11/01 Note that WTC1 was “officially hit” at about 8:46 A.M.

Cathy, to the best of her recollection, recalls “about four seismic events” in her apartment— which is between the 10th and 20th floor of her building-- with “the first one being the largest”, and “the other three were significantly less intense” and can now be seen to likely be after-shocks, that “came in approx. 30 sec intervals after the main one.” Cathy says she can never forget seeing “books fall off their shelves”, and seeing or feeling the “floor jumping up and down”, and her almost losing her balance at that time between 8:30 and 9.00 A.M. She did not know, at the time about what was happening, or just happened, at the WTC. She says she did not experience these things when the second tower was “hit.” It is also important to note that Cathy T did not experience any Seismic activity during either “collapse’ event.

All this indicates the “official” regime Seismic recordings are a farce, as I have previously written and had published here. The Seismic “readings” admittedly are “re-analyses” of data, as requested by the regime. Now according to the US Geological Survey, the “collapse” maxima of 2.1 and 2.3 might not be felt even right where it was occurring, or just barely felt and not cause the effects Cathy felt a mile away from the first “plane hit.” Though I am a physicist and not a geologist, I have been in 5.1 Earthquakes and have done some reading on these matters. IMO, to be transmitted at such a level of intensity one mile north, and possibly further, directly implies a seismic level of at least 4.0, at the origin. There is always the possibility that wave phenomena led to reinforcements at local hotpsots (perhaps anti-nodes) which included her building. The spikes of the two “plane impacts” are “officially” 0.9 and 0.7 respectively. Far greater energy than is contained in quakes of these levels would be needed to cause the events felt by Cathy T, a mile away. Thus, I assert, the “plane hit” spikes in the seismographs were likely greatly truncated! (As were the “collapse” spikes.) Now it is questionable whether a plane hit, or an explosion, high up would transmit much energy to the ground as the energy would likely first be absorbed by the building itself. But if a simultaneous sub-basement nuke was set off, this would likely have a large seismic spike that would need to be “re-analyzed/truncated” as the gov’t requested.

So tying the eyewitness report of Cathy T. to my earlier articles, it is likely that in the nuclear demolition of the WTC towers, perhaps the largest nukes employed occurred in the sub-basements, using the “plane hits” as “camouflage.” And that many smaller nukes were used during the actual demolition-- along with some conventional explosives as I have detailed previously.

Recall also that earlier I have stated that other regime-released “scientific” data is bogus. This includes the second AVIRIS (ground tempeature) data set; and this has been massively verified by other data and countless eyewitnesses, molten boots and more. And this article I wrote, also has a fireman describing a seismic event during collapse that had to be significantly more than a 2.1 or 2.3.

http://covertoperations.blogspot.com/2007/11/eyewitness-testimony-of-firefighters.html

It also contains: eyewitness testimony of firefighters believing they were nuked on 9/11 from feeling great heat on their skin without any fire near them, as well as early WTC7 destruction, Electromagetic Pulse, non-impact plane flyby, and people being pushed out of a WTC tower.

From the timing that Cathy relates, these seismic events appear to have occurred around the time that the first (CGI) plane “impacted” the first tower. This is further support for my hypotheses, appearing in my articles, that each time a CGI plane “hit” a tower, (actually upper explosions set off), the regime also set off a basement nuke. (As I have written, to allow for bottom over collapse, in case the intricate top-bottom collapse--which involved many mini-nukes--failed to occur. I have written herein on the need for redundancy by the regime.) Recall I have quoted engineers that stated that a sub-basement floor and garage were “just gone,” and that a 50-ton steel press was vaporized, and that a steel/concrete door was shriveled up like aluminum foil-- all at the time of the first “plane hit”. (Statements made by Engineer Mike Pecoraro. See: http://covertoperations.blogspot.com/2007/08/by-anonymous-physicist-sgt.html
and my other nuclear demolition articles at www.wtcdemolition.blogpsot.com)

Of course all this, and the now revealed much larger earthquake(s) felt a mile away, can only arise from nukes-- and not from gravitational collapse of pristine pancakes, or evidence-free and cold DEW, or thermite which never vaporized anything let alone whole floors and massive steel presses. Neither does thermite stay hot for months and cause the China Syndrome of radioactive fragments generating high heat for months, and thus the molten metal still seen six months later. See here www.wtc-chinasyndrome.blogspot.com

So we now have eyewitness testimony that larger earthquakes-- which directly implies nuclear bomb use-- occurred on 9/11, than the regime has allowed to promulgate, via its Goebbels-like MSM, or the intel agency-controlled “911truth” forums.

========

911 - More Evidence & Testimony Indicating Nuclear Blasts, Nuclear Radiation, & China Syndrome at the WTC

More Evidence & Testimony Indicating Nuclear Blasts, Nuclear Radiation, & China Syndrome at the WTC

By The Anonymous Physicist

Sgt. Matthew Tartaglia, a WTC responder, rescue worker, counselor, and FEMA consultant has made many remarkable statements related to the nuking of the WTC, and its China Syndrome aftermath.

Tartaglia, said he believes “tactical nukes” took down the towers, and was responsible for the high temperatures weeks and months later (but does not know of the existence of the China Syndrome.) His statements include these: “…There were only certain parts of the site that you could not legally leave without going through decontamination.…They would tackle you and take your camera away. I watched people be tackled.” Most responders couldn’t go “down in the garages…The rescue people – when our clothes got so contaminated, we were told not to bring our clothes off that site. Don’t wear anything on the site you’re not prepared to leave there because it’s contaminated.” Note that “discarding clothing”, and “going through decontamination” are standard nuclear industry methods of dealing with radiation-exposed individuals. I do not know if other industries necessitate the use of these methods as well.

In 2005, Sgt. Tartaglia said, “My teeth are falling out.” Like hanging skin resulting from a nuclear bomb, teeth falling out is a common symptom, months or years later, from nuclear radiation exposure. (Other factors can also possibly cause this, but are less likely.) Read about this Army veteran sent to Hiroshima, just days after it was nuked, to bulldoze roads. This was apparently much too soon to send Americans in to Hiroshima, but the PTB apparently cared as much about Americans, as they did about the Japanese women and children who were nuked. I note that after the July 16, 1945 Trinity “A-Bomb” test, Dr. J. Robert Oppenheimer and General Leslie Groves did not return to Ground Zero until five weeks later on Sept 11, 1945. Yes, there is 9/11 again. So man did not walk again on the first alleged Ground Zero which resulted from the “Manhattan Project” until 9/11/45. Also read here about 3 veterans of atomic bomb tests in Nevada in the 1950’s who had their teeth fall out within a few years of their radiation exposure. [To quickly find the 3 veterans cited, search on “teeth.”] That article also indicates that the gov’t lied to them as to the amount of radiation they had received. It is excerpted from the book, “They Never Knew: The Victims of Atomic Testing”, [not read here] by Glenn Alan Cheney. See also “The Plutonium Files” by Welsome, and the two books on the “Making of the A-Bomb”, and the H-Bomb, “Dark Sun”, both by Rhodes--all three read here.

But please read this (portions of the book, They Never Knew) in its entirety. It includes the following remarkable quote that may be very relevant to 9/11 research. A whistleblower came forward decades later about the actual radiation exposure Army personnel were subjected to. “In 1982, a former Army medic, Van R. Brandon, admitted that he had been ordered to keep two sets of books. "One set was to show that no one received an exposure above the approved dosimeter reading," he said. "The other set of books was to show what the actual reading was. That set of books was brought in a locked briefcase attached to [an officer]'s wrist by a set of handcuffs every morning." Army personnel were denied medical benefits and disability because the regime publicly used the “cooked” book. Do you think this same govt has gotten more or less evil, corrupt, and duplicitous, in the ensuing decades--and in a matter that relates to possibly irradiating tens of thousands of WTC workers, responders, and near-by residents.

The statements made by Mike Pecoraro, a WTC1 stationary engineer, and 9/11 survivor, are also remarkable. Pecoraro first knew something was wrong after observing flickering lights (EMP?), and then he ascended to the sub-basement C level, from below. He says, "There was nothing there but rubble, we're talking about a 50 ton hydraulic press gone!" Pecoraro and a co-worker “made their way to the parking garage, but found that it, too, was gone”… As they ascended to the B Level, one floor above, they “were astonished to see a steel and concrete fire door that weighed about 300 pounds, wrinkled up like a piece of aluminum foil" and lying on the floor. Now I assert that this too is a likely sign that a nuclear bomb went off. Perhaps only the multi-million degree temperature at the hypocenter, or neutron bombardment, is capable of doing that to that heavy steel door. The article continues: “"They got us again,"” Mike told his co-worker, referring to the terrorist attack at the center in 1993. Having been through that bombing, Mike recalled seeing similar things happen to the building's structure.” This last statement from Pecoraro, I assert may be corroboration of nuclear engineer/geologist Phil Schneider’s statement that his inspection of the 1993 WTC explosion damage revealed to him that it was a nuclear blast, that may have gone awry, that is, was insufficient. (See my previous articles at wtcdemolition.blogspot.com.) Pecoraro states that as WTC2 “collapsed,” “there was a wind that came through the revolving doors that blew me [in the WTC1 lobby area] 100 feet to the far wall” Was this a nuclear pressure blast? You’ve probably seen the videos of A-bomb test sites, and resultant winds blowing down model houses, and heat causing fires. Like this and this.

More evidence of the likely nuking of the WTC, and China Syndrome aftermath, comes from no less than CNN’s Larry King Show. This show aired on 10/6/01, and was taped at the WTC, and a nearby burn unit, in the days prior to the air-date. The transcript is here.

Regarding the likely China Syndrome of high heat three weeks later, Thomas Von Essen, NYC Fire Commissioner, says, at the WTC, “…it's so hot, it's a really hot fire. The steel has been hot for three weeks now. Tremendous heat below, you know. It's -- the fire is not out down below.” From my earlier articles, you know that this went on for at least six months after 9/11.

At the Weill Burn Center at the Cornell Medical Hospital, Larry King interviews two women who received burns—without any fire--while trying to flee WTC1.

King: “So, did you know you were on fire, in a sense?”

Yang: “No, I wasn't on fire, I think it was from the heat.“

Mary Jo: “That's what we were told, it was the heat.”

So like Felipe David, like the Hiroshima survivors, these two women have no clue as to why their skin was burned. And who told them “it was from the heat”? And if it was the doctors, who told them to say this to the patients? Note that King says “…fire in a sense.” I assert that that sense is not fire per se, but bombardment by radiation (thermal rays, gamma rays, neutrons) that can cause heat at the skin, and damage the skin--if the flux is large enough (relevant parameters include distance, shielding, intensity and type of radiation).

King also interviews burn victim Brian Reeves, a security guard starting his rounds in the lobby of one of the towers. Reeves says: “I don't know when I got burned, but I just know when it knocked me over, there was -- there was something, the windows blew out. And when the windows blew out, I was on the ground, and like I said, there was a gust of wind. And when I opened my eyes, I seen a bright orange light.” Reeves, feeling heat on his back, takes his jacket off and falls on the ground while fleeing. There is the issue of whether his jacket is on fire or not. [Months later, the media would morph the “bright orange light” into “fireball.”] We must ask, did Reeves see the flash of, and receive the radiation, and air pressure blast from, a mini-nuke? Like the Hiroshima victims, he knows there had to be “something” but he/they didn’t see what burned him/them. In this video, months after 9/11, Reeves then says “the fire was this close to my face” (and holds his hand near his face). He did not say any such thing 2-3 weeks after 9/11, when interviewed by King.

Getting back to the King show, Dr. Roger Yurt of the Weill Burn Center says, “[Reeve’s] worst burns were on his back, some burns up on his head. Burns on your arms also.” My possible interpretation is the following. Likely his jacket was not on fire (note the burns on his head), and the jacket likely shielded him from receiving even more radiation! The source of which was apparently behind him, as his burns were mostly on his back, but also on his head. But if the flux of radiation is high enough, a person and/or their clothes will catch fire from the radiation. Many Hiroshima victims were immediately killed and left in a charred state. The “bright orange flash” he “saw” may well have been a flux of radiation onto his retina. This kind of thing is again known from Army veterans of the nuclear blasts in Nevada in the 1950’s. In the worst cases, numerous Army personnel were forced to be, in ditches, only a football field away from an atomic bomb going off!

But when Brian tells his story months later, the reporter adds “fireball” several times in her telling the story. Even the direction of the alleged fireball is cleverly, and falsely, inserted: “… a fireball that roared down the elevator shaft.” In actuality, from numerous lobby, and sub-basement witnesses, a non-fireball, a likely nuclear detonation, occurred below the lobby, and its effects traveled UP a few floors—and not down some 80-90 floors from the likely conventional explosion above. In any case, Reeves did not observe what may, or may not, have been traversing the elevator shaft. It appears that in the telling of the 9/11 survivors’ accounts, the MSM, and the 911 pseudo-truth media, are doing everything they can to add “fire” and “fireball” to the later retelling of numerous survivors’ tales. And these survivors, who did not report “fire” initially, and not knowing about such things as radiation-induced burns—without any fire—may later start including this in their own accounts, after doctors, or reporters, or hidden (or not so hidden) handlers either keep repeating the “fire” and “fireball” memes to them; or perhaps in some cases threatening/rewarding the survivors to start telling it the way their handlers demand. Never forget how FBI, or secret service agents, both on the scene in Dallas and later during depositions, threatened eyewitnesses to President Kennedy’s assassination, if they either said they clearly saw the Secret Service driver do it, or that there also were shots from the grassy knoll. Experts in eyewitness testimony tell us that the most accurate account is the closest in time to the event.

Remember how sub-basement, 9/11 burn victim Felipe David’s own accounting never mentions “fire” or “fireball,” but his alleged rescuer, William Rodriquez added fire or fireball to his accounting of David’s experiences. You will have to be the judge after reading survivors’ accounts shortly after the event, and then months later after media/(govt?) interviews. This is a crucial point in the likely tampering of witnesses to a heinous crime. It is particularly odious as this may be ongoing from deep-cover intel assets in the major, AND internet “truth”, media. But if the government/media had nothing to fear, or cover-up, why do they have to change so many burn victims’ testimonies? Likewise they are frequently inserting “plane hits” into statements, when the witness couldn’t possibly have seen that, even if the plane hits were real, instead of CGI.

I believe we are only scratching the surface regarding evidence of the use of mini-nukes on 9/11. Many fire and police witnesses fear losing their jobs, or their pensions. Beginning a month after 9/11, NYC Fire Commissioner von Essen’s office took depositions of 503 fire personnel, port authority police and EMT first responders. The report is 12,000 pages long and rarely read [and not read here]. It was deliberately excluded from the 911 Commission, and NIST, reports (scroll down at link). Could they be hiding evidence, not of the widely known explosions/controlled demolition, but specifically of the nuking of the towers and 3000 people? After von Essen’s 503 witness interviews, former CIA director Robert Woolsey, was inserted into this in 2002, as the NYC Fire Department's “Anti-terrorism Consultant.” (It’s interesting that Wikipedia omits this job in his bio.) He issued a gag order, under threat of job loss and worse, down the ranks, under the guise of “anti-terrorism.” This report is the one that includes EMT, Patricia Ondrovic’ [See my articles on her here] heavily redacted, but remarkable interview. Recall my analysis demonstrated she witnessed Electromagnetic Pulse from a nuclear bomb causing flickering lights and making cars catch fire, for no apparent reason (“toasted cars”), right near her, and also jets shooting down other jets in the sky over the Hudson. Was Woolsey in charge of the redacting, of her, and other, testimony? I make the assertion that the very purpose of interviewing these 503 9/11 witnesses and responders was to find out who had witnessed evidence of the nuking of the WTC, and to then threaten, and silence them! Perhaps too many to kill, so first try to silence them! Here are the full 503 interviews. It would be good if some real 911 researcher could read them all or search for when portions are redacted. Note my scanning them indicates that numerous witnesses report “explosions;” this was not reason enough for redaction!

There is other eyewitness (or should I say skinwitness) evidence, I believe of the heat, and radiation, wave which emanates outwards from a nuclear blast from numerous people who happened to be in the vicinity of the towers. This article states that “John Axisa, who was getting off a commuter train to the World Trade Center, …[after the alleged first plane hit]… Then there was a second explosion, and he felt heat on the back of [his] neck.” Note the timing of the “second” explosion he heard--nothing from which was seen exiting the building--and yet he felt the heat at that exact time! This again could only be from a nuke, I assert. (The DEW hangout theorists always say their alleged DEW is cold.) Also at a 911 forum, a forum administrator named Quest noted that, “I have an acquaintance who was a NYC cop on 9/11 when the second tower came down. He was 3 blocks away and told me there was "incredible heat" during the "collapse".” Heat indeed is the thing that would be felt furthest out from a nuclear blast. Read this account of physicist, Dr. Phillip Morrison 10 miles from the Trinity nuclear test site. He said, "Suddenly, not only was there a bright light, but where we were, 10 miles away, there was the heat of the sun on our faces.” [This was before the Sun came up.] So we see the similarity of statements, regarding heat during a nuclear blast, made by the Trinity witness, John Axisa, Quest’s policeman, Felipe David, and the three burn victims interviewed by Larry King. I have written that the nukes used on 9/11 were 1/100th to 1/1000th (each) of the intensity of the Trinity blast (with several per tower used, and only one per smaller WTC buildings) and we also have some shielding by the building. So the distance that radiation would be able to propagate would be vastly less than the 10 miles felt by Dr. Morrison (noted above), where the test was in the open air. Those in the towers, and nearby, would indeed be bombarded by the (unseen) radiation from a mini-nuke. Given these ideas from this physicist, who has taught physics at several universities, can Quest please further interview his cop friend, and get back to us here at comments, or via email to Spooked?

There has been at least one study published of WTC responders’ medical problems treated on scene, from 9/14/01 to 11/20/1, at the WTC. This was published in May-June, 2005, of “Prehospital and Disaster Medicine,” and was authored by: K.R. Peritt, W.L. Boal, and “The Helix Group, Inc.” This third “author” listed is a media corporation. (I did not know that corporations, per se, could now be authors?) This study related to a 10 week period whereby a Federal govt agency, the “United States Public Health Service (USPHS), deployed Disaster Medical Assistance Teams (DMATs) and the Commissioned Corps to provide on-site, primary medical care to anyone who presented.” The authors conclusion admits, the “USPHS visits probably were skewed to milder complaints when compared to analyses of employer medical department reports or hospital cases…” This appears to mean that the more serious cases went straight to the hospital. There were 9,349 on-site patient visits, which included some surrounding residents. There were 30 cases of nausea and vomiting. Let us look at skin conditions reported. There were 253 1st or 2nd degree burns, of which 107 (42%) were said to be related to equipment use. There is no word on what caused the other 58% of these burns. In addition, there are 132 cases of “other” skin problems reported. There is not a single case of third degree burns (the most serious), and no comment on this lack! Were there people with more serious burns that went straight to the hospital, and thus are not counted? There are some curious statistics: “Other injury or illness: 696 cases,” and “Not classifiable as an injury or illness: 920 cases.” That’s quite a lot of cases that are either “other” or “not classifiable,” about 17%. Why such a high percentage? They’re not “psychological” because they reported 78 cases of this. Is any medical condition being covered up? Did they test for radiation which is not mentioned? And what caused the 146 cases of burns that were not due to equipment handling? And how many people had third degree burns among the responders? Or is this classified information, related to what really was happening at the WTC, even after its demolition? This study is very troubling, and looks very “doctored.”

In conclusion now, this article, and my previous articles archived at wtcdemolition.blogspot.com and wtc-ChinaSyndrome.blogspot.com indicate the following. The proven existence of mini-nukes and micro-nukes , the massive outward explosions seen, the vaporization of a steel press, the wrinkling into “foil” of a steel door, spherical blast wave destruction, the “nuclear meteorite,[parts of 4 storeys fused together at extreme temp.,]” the feeling of heat without fire of numerous witnesses, the burned or hanging skin--without fire, the responders’ teeth later falling out, the vaporized building contents, the 1157 vaporized people, the massive evidence of the China Syndrome of resultant nuclear reacting fragments causing the very high heat and molten steel witnessed by many at least six months after 9/11, and photographed, the clothing discarding, and decontamination procedures, my detailed explanation of Ondrovic’ account of Electromagnetic Pulse and resultant car fire, and the door exploding into her as WTC 5, 6, were being exploded from within, near her, the micro- or nano-fine particle size, and much more, all indicate the federal regime set off numerous mini-nuclear bombs in the WTC on 9/11. The witnesses that my articles have cited, included numerous WTC workers, numerous firefighters, EMT worker, responders, stationary engineer, fire engineering professor, top British and American Structural Engineers who have been shown “secret” photos denied to the rest of us, NYC Commissioner, NYC Fire Commissioner, policeman, and others. Many (or the vast majority of the 503 who were found) other on-scene witnesses have—for the moment—likely been silenced, as detailed herein—which is witness tampering, and worse. Scientific data have also been cited, including —AVIRIS, LIDAR, seismic readings before “collapse”, Tritium finding (UCAL/Berkeley, and subsequent Tahil study), and the now exploding number of “rare” cancers among responders, including thyroid, leukemia, and lymph cancer—all common among radiation victims. Other data, I have asserted has been altered, or is totally hidden--second long-delayed AVIRIS data set, and the lack of any further AVIRIS released.

I assert and accuse— J’Accuse”—that the preponderance of this evidence demonstrates that the federal government of the United States of America did explode nuclear bombs inside most of the WTC buildings on 9/11/01. Furthermore, there was a resultant China Syndrome (through mechanisms detailed here by me previously) of nuclear reacting fragments releasing ionizing radiation, and high heat, for at least six months after 9/11, causing molten steel, and radiation exposure to thousands of responders and NYC residents. This was an act of treason, conspiracy, mass murder, genocide, and a ruse for waging war on innocent peoples around the world—crimes against humanity, and a ruse for blatantly eradicating American citizens freedoms and rights. The 9/11 WTC nuclear holocaust was not likely even the first time the American regime did this to its own citizens! Too few people know of this research into the American government’s probable nuking of American sailors in 1944.

The 9/11 perpetrators have used, and are using, limited hangouts and psyops to keep the people from knowing this. These hangouts, ultimately from the U.S. regime’s “intelligence” agencies, include the bogus “theories” of the official planes/fuel/gravity/pancaking nonsense, and also thermite, DEW, and Depleted Uranium [D.U.] (any uranium used on 9/11 at the WTC, and the China Syndrome aftermath, would have been highly enriched, not depleted). The observed American military helicopters and planes directing the initial explosions, and the final nuclear destruction prove that this was not done by Arabs, Muslims, Iranians, Israelis, Russians, or Chinese. As with the Kennedy Assassination, this massive set of actions, and massive cover-up, could only have been perpetrated by the so-called government of the United States, and not by any small “rogue elements” therein. Complicit in the original act, and/or its cover-up, are all the branches of the federal government, its military, and intelligence agencies, and the Main Stream Media, and even much of the so-called alternative or internet media which is also laden with intel agents posing as “truthers,” while pushing the hangouts listed above. The people of the world must get together, in what may be their final hour, and act literally to save themselves from extermination, from the handful of monsters that control humanity. Nature has demonstrated that individuals trained to be fearful can all come together, and overcome this fear, and act and defeat the small number who had previously seemed to be so invincible and bloodthirsty. We are indeed likewise in the jaws of these monsters, and have been for a long time; but likewise again, it is still possible to break free, and be free. We must try. Like this last video, there are so many more of us, than of them.

911 - Eyewitness Testimony of Firefighters Believing They Were Nuked on 9/11

Eyewitness Testimony of Firefighters Believing They Were Nuked on 9/11

... as well as early WTC7 Destruction, EMP, non-impact plane flyby, and people being pushed out of a WTC tower.


By The Anonymous Physicist


Reading just a handful out of the 503 9/11 WTC initial responders’ testimonies has proven to be a real eye-opener. These firefighters’ and EMS officers’ depositions provide good corroboration for many of the things I have hypothesized at this blog, including the following: The WTC was demolished via small nuclear bombs, that pre-“collapse” basement nukes were set off in the towers, synchronous with the “plane hit” explosions above, that there likely were EMP’s (Electromagnetic Pulses from nukes), and that WTC7 underwent early explosions, and attempted early demolition.

Firefighter Edward Kennedy here states that he thought a “nuclear bomb” had demolished a tower. “We were on Liberty Street and we came out into there and it just look like something that -- it looked like a bomb, of course, had gone off, almost like a nuclear bomb... “

Here we learn that NYFD Lt. George DeSimone similarly thought the heat--without fire--impinging on him was Hiroshima-like:
“I thought it was some kind of thermal explosion where I'm either going to get burnt -- and I had kind of ideas that it was going to be something like Hiroshima where all this heat was coming at me and we were going to get burnt…”
Several hours after both tower “collapses”, and despite official regime claims of total military and civilian flight termination, he said:
"...We saw jets overhead, commercial airliner, military jets, Air Force jets, and we didn't know what the hell was going on..."
Recall I have detailed how a nuke’s thermal rays go farthest out, well beyond its destructive blast radius. Here NYFD Chief Jerry Gumbo’s testimony is one of several I have cited, to say he felt heat far away from any actual fire. He stated:
"...At the time of the impact, we were able to feel heat that was generated from the explosion at the command post, which was across West Street, and West is fairly large street with that island in there, and debris was showering all over West Street."
I believe this is again indication of the early basement nuke concomitant with the “plane hit” explosion above.

Another firefighter who thought the WTC destruction was nuclear is NYFD Lt Richard Smiouskas, whose statement is here. He was an official NYFD photographer, and has some startling testimony, regarding other matters, as well. It appears that with his telefoto lens, he witnessed people being pushed out of tower one. He said:
"...I was photographing the fire from the roof. I had a long lens on the camera, and I had people in the windows. It looked like they were being -- they weren't actually jumping. One or two people I saw, they seemed like they were being forced out by the people behind them. There was half a dozen faces. In between the smoke you could see people..." (snip) "I guess they were all trying to get air, and this guy was actually standing in the window, standing in the frame with each hand on each frame and he kind of like got nudged out."
In the second sentence, it looks like he just stopped himself from saying “pushed”. The last incident may even indicate the NON-jumper was trying to keep himself from being pushed out!

Lt. Smiouskas believed that a nuclear bomb went off, due to the magnitude of Earth shaking that he felt. As a tower is being destroyed he recalls:
"It looked like an earthquake. The ground was shaking. I fell to the floor. My camera bag opened up. The cameras went skidding across the floor…I'm thinking maybe a bomb blew up. I'm thinking it could have been a nuclear….”
Then he writes of seeing “glitter” through the black smoke, during tower destruction.
“Everybody started running north, and this huge volume like ten stories high billowing, pushing black smoke and like a glitter. I guess it was glass that was glitter that was in the cloud of smoke.”
I do not believe this “glitter” was glass in the black smoke. Perhaps it is more likely that gamma rays from nuclear explosions which could readily traverse the black smoke, impinged on his retina. This is like the atronauts in earth orbit seeing (retinal) flashes from cosmic rays when they tried to go to a higher earth orbit, and like medical x-rays that go through you and onto a photographic plate.

But note how Lt. Smiouskas found the ground shaking was intense enough that he surmised (correctly, IMO) that a nuclear bomb went off. Now, I have been in 5.1 (Richter scale) Earthquakes, and in 2.3’s. The latter I didn’t feel at all, and the 5.1 sounds more like what Lt. Smiouskas (and I) experienced—at least a likely 4.0. I also was at the WTC six weeks after 9/11, and saw many cracked, concrete sidewalks, blocks away from the WTC, (as well as experienced my eyes burning from the hot toxic gases still emitted.) I therefore make the following assertion. It is likely that the “official” 2.1 and 2.3 Richter scale recordings on 9/11 had their spikes cut off! I have even found that NIST asked for a “re-analysis” of seismic data from one observatory before publishing their “findings.” So, just as I hypothesized about the long-delayed second AVIRIS (WTC temperature) data set, the seismic recordings were likely doctored by this regime. And this fire-fighter’s belief that the intense ground shaking was due to a “nuclear bomb” supports this hypothesis.

The interview of Dr. Michael Guttenberg, of NYFD’s Office of Medical Affairs, who may have witnessed EMP is here.

Just after the second “plane hit” explosion, and before any tower “collapse”, he noted:
“…on the EMS radio, there was absolute silence for probably 10 or 15 seconds, you know, which to me, it seemed like 10 to 15 seconds, but it was absolute radio silence for a few seconds…”
Questioner:
“We were told that the air was so thick with debris that radio waves weren't able to travel.”
M.G.:
“That was after the towers came down.”
Note two things, the radios went dead—likely a sign of EMP, as I have previously described. And see how the questioner attempts to confuse the issue with a double lie. One, that this happened after a tower was destroyed, when instead, this is after the second WTC2 “plane hit” explosion, and before any tower “collapse” as Dr. Guttenberg corrects him. And two, that radio waves would have been blocked by a conventional explosion, when they wouldn’t have been. And note also that this radio blackout occurred after the second “plane hit” explosion. My previous articles contained evidence, and my hypothesis, that the WTC1 “plane hit” explosion was used as cover for a nearly concomitant basement nuclear bomb explosion that vaporized a 50 ton steel press, and a garage level, and also caused phone outage. So we learn now that electronic communications also were affected after the second “plane hit”, which may indicates that they also nuked the basement of WTC2 at that time. I hypothesized that this was done in case the planned, subsequent, intricate, top-down demolition failed.

Guttenberg also provides more eyewitness testimony for early WTC7 explosions, as he went to the loading area of WTC7.
“…We all stuffed ourselves into this hallway [near the loading dock of WTC7], pulled the door shut, and the noise just got very loud and the room filled with dust. The noise stopped, and we opened up the door, and everything was pitch black. The way we got into the loading dock was not the way we were getting out. It was obstructed.”
This appears to be a watered down way of saying WTC underwent internal explosions. This jives with my earlier article citing Deputy Director of the NYC Emergency Services Dept., Barry Jennings, that the WTC7 underwent attempted complete internal destruction at the same time that the first tower (and WTC 3, 4, 5, 6) were demolished. My article, on top here hypothesized that fizzled nukes was the reason WTC7 was not successfully destroyed during this early coordinated attempt, which Jennings stated destroyed much of the lobby, now corroborated by Guttenberg. The last URL also has my earlier articles on nuclear demolition of the WTC.

NYFD Lt. Robert Larocco here also noted that tower destruction seemed “nuclear” to him. He said,
“Of course the cloud was kind of like a nuclear winter thing. You're walking through fallout.”
Near the towers, but BEFORE either tower “collapse”, he noted:
“As I started walking onto the side street – actually as I stepped onto the side street, the strangest thing I noticed was there was like three inches of snow on the ground. The snow was probably pulverized concrete, sheetrock, loose tiles, insulation, asbestos or what-have-you.”
Now this fine ash or 3 inches of snow-like “pulverized concrete” as he called it would not occur from a “plane hit” or conventional explosives. Could this fine, 3 inches of “snow” be from the early basement nukes I have written about? Like the WTC1 basement blast that vaporized a steel press, and a parking garage level that eyewitnesses said was just “gone.”

Now some DEW/OCT disinfo agents claim that the tower destruction was not loud because their hangout was not loud. During the commencement of WTC2 destruction, Lt. Larocco stated:
“The next second I heard that loudest noise in the world that I was describing before getting louder and louder.” (snip) “It was the loudest noise I've ever heard in my life. It was in both ears. Kind of like those rockets that they launch the space shuttles with, it was like I had one going off in each ear. When I thought it was the loudest noise I ever heard, every second it was just increasing getting louder and louder and louder.”
Lt Larocco also describes very personal feelings of fear of death, and fellow firefighters “crying like babies” during and just after collapse. These revelations prove that the redactions in the published responders’ statements were not because of wanting to hide the most personal of feelings.

Lt. Larocco also stated that hours after both towers were destroyed:
“…I still really didn't believe that the second tower was hit by a second plane.”
At this point, the interviewer, Monte Feiler, says, “Stopping the interview at 1306.” Then, “Resuming the tape at 1308 hours. Same people present.”

Now Lt. Larocco says: “
Like I said, the rumors were flying around, and they turned out to be quite factual, about the second tower getting hit. Although at the time I really didn't believe it until I saw it later on television. The thing about the Pentagon, the plane crashing out in Pennsylvania, it was all coming into the picture that this is something major going on.”
So we see how something happened during this “time out.” Something he was told and recalling what was “on TV” apparently made him change his mind and believe in the second “plane hit.” This manipulation speaks for itself. And if there really were plane hits, would the PTB need to perform such blatent manipulations of eyewitness testimony?

Finally I note that when he was making his way out after “collapse,” Lt. Larocco recalls:
“I thought to myself this is a locked exit. That's illegal.”
We see, as some survivors have noted, many fire escape exits were locked. Someone--who may have had a master key--apparently locked numerous exits. If such a man is ascertained, and his actions proven to be deliberate, he should be charged with mass murder.

My interpretation of EMT Frank Puma’s deposition here indicates that he may have witnessed a FLYBY, and not a “plane impact” regarding the alleged “second hit.” He said:
“…I ran down to the corner of Church and Park Place, looked up and I saw the plane shooting out of the top of the towers. That's when I grabbed for my radio and yelled over the air, "1 Adam. A bomb just went off in the Trade Center."...
Note that after he witnessed an apparent flyby, HE CALLED IN A BOMB, and NOT a plane impact! In fact, when you couple his statement to the interviewer, with his action of exactly what he called in, it seems clear that he believed the plane he saw bombed the WTC! And this must be considered a possibility. However, all the evidence and the ludicrous “plane-shaped” hole itself indicate shape charges, at that facade, were set off in sync with a flyby (and basement nukes).

Finally, for those who grasp the deeper conspiracies I have elucidated here, I note that Firefighter Michael Wernick here stated the number of the Fire Engine that apparently responded first to the WTC, on 9/11. Wernick said, “Engine 33 went first.” As I have written here before, “All things nuclear…”

911 - The Crucial Differences in the Nuclear 9/11 Theories

The Crucial Differences in the Nuclear 9/11 Theories

A Call To Eliminate Nuclear 9/11 Mis- or Dis-Information & Attain Completeness and Fit all the Known Evidence

by The Anonymous Physicist

Several, differing WTC nuclear destruction scenarios have been put forth by their respective authors. While they all have nuclear explosions in common; they have key differences. These differences must be openly examined, and used to strive towards a final nuclear 911 WTC destruction scenario that fits all the evidence, and is not contraindicated by the Laws of Physics. Nuclear WTC scenarios that do not fit all the evidence, or contain false statements, or are contradicted by physical law need to be abandoned.


1. Within a year or two of 9/11/01 people began to post at physics forums that WTC destruction seemed to involve nuclear bombs.

2. By 2005, the first website appeared which contained a nuclear WTC destruction scenario by an Anonymous Finnish Military Expert. He hypothesized that one upwardly-focused, sub-basement shape-charge-like nuke was used to destroy each tower. Tower destruction, he stated, was likely done with the aid of conventional explosives as needed. The Finn also hypothesized that the single nuke was a fourth generation, fission-free thermonuclear (pure fusion) device. He cited the alleged Tritium finding by U.S. Gov’t scientists. Therefore (fusion only), there could be no China Syndrome Aftermath with this theory.

3. In 2006, William Tahil wrote a book and offered it for sale online. (It is now downloadable for free.) Tahil also claimed that one deep underground nuclear explosion per tower occurred, but that they weren’t bombs per se. Rather, he claims, there were two huge, underground, fission nuclear reactors already present, which were made to go supercritical, and explode in a nuclear fashion. Tahil wrote that a China Syndrome Aftermath resulted.

4. In 2007, this Anonymous [American] Physicist offered a detailed, nuclear WTC destruction scenario. Many small nukes were said to have been employed during tower destruction, but some conventional explosives may also have been used to allow the nukes to be small, and not vaporize the outer tower structure. After first incorporating all the “official” evidence, that included findings that supported both fission and fusion; he [I] first wrote that either fission-initiated fusion bombs or tritium-boosted fission bombs were used.

But after finding massive, irrefutable evidence of the China Syndrome Aftermath at the WTC for up to six months-- until the fissioning, radioactive fragments were carted away-- and noting that the China Syndrome can supposedly only occur from fissioning remnants, not fusion components, the Anonymous Physicist has stated the following. The alleged Tritium data release to the public may be a clever regime ploy (red herring) to get people to look for the mythical fourth generation nuke precisely because it is fission-free, and therefore you couldn’t have WHAT WE DID HAVE-- THE CHINA SYNDROME AFTERMATH at the WTC. Since the evidence of the China Syndrome of a massive heat-generating source existed at the WTC for months afterwards, and only fission fragments could cause this heat GENERATION for so long, the bombs likely were fission bombs. The Govt then deliberately released bogus information (Tritium), as covering up the China Syndrome Aftermath was their most crucial Op-Plan after 9/11. The China Syndrome arose, and HAD TO ARISE perforce, because a fission nuke uses only 1-6% of its fissile material. The remainder is left over and will remain fissioning for a long time, as the half-life of Uranium 235 is 700 million years. Also the concepts of redundant nukes, "fratricided" nukes, and fizzled nukes were detailed in my papers, and all lead to a China Syndrome Aftermath.

Furthermore, the massive disinfo efforts by the American regime, and its agents, make clear how important it was/is to cover up the nuking, and the China Syndrome Aftermath in NEW YORK CITY. As usual, disinfo agents try too hard. Their M.O. is often clear to see. The hangouts known as the Official Conspiracy Theory (OCT), and “DEW” blatantly lie that there was no heat during or after WTC destruction. And another hangout (thermite) has its proponent admit to the great heat for months, but must lie and claim that “thermite burns forever,” when it actually cools off in minutes or hours. The final step, in the intel agencies’ disinformation scheme--as more and more people see the truth of the nuclear destruction of the WTC, and the China Syndrome Aftermath-- is to plant individuals (mostly online personalities) who will pretend to be pro-nuclear 9/11. All the while everything they write is meant to confuse, confound, and actually belittle the nuclear 9/11 hypothesis with ludicrous or irrelevant claims. They will be easy to spot; they will likely never cite my research and articles on the nuclear destruction of the WTC, and the China Syndrome Aftermath. They will cite the other theories above-- but not mine-- precisely because of the unchanging flaws in the others, as detailed above. So please be aware of new, allegedly nuclear 9/11 proponents who may actually try to confound the issue; and present mis-, or dis-information, or irrelevancies, or pretend it is unknowable, or doesn’t matter.

Let us now examine the first two detailed nuclear WTC destruction scenarios listed above. First, let us look at the Finnish military expert’s claims of one sub-basement, pure fusion, shape-charged-like, upwardly focused nuke per tower. This appears to be erroneous in several ways. First the observed, top-down, destruction mechanism, and the earlier, highly likely nuclear sub-basement explosion (see more below) both belie the one nuke per tower hypothesis. The Finn has stated that he is an expert on shape charges, and that the top/down scenario could have been done via nuclear shape charges in the sub-basement. But the website that has his articles says that his translator refused to translate his details of how this could have occurred. But even if theoretically possible, the details of the early likely nuclear, sub-basement explosion (see below) demonstrate that his one nuke per tower scenario is untenable. Likewise, this Anonymous Physicist, has proposed that the hunt for the pure fusion, 4th generation nuke is likely a deliberate, planted red herring precisely because this would obviate what did take place-- the China Syndrome Aftermath. So I contend that the Finnish Military Expert’s hypotheses of 1. Pure fusion nuke, 2. One nuke per tower in the basement are incorrect. The Finn also says that “red mercury” could be one way to attain fusion without prerequisite fission. This is the “red mercury” scam, that I have shown here is physically impossible to cause fusion; and is a British American Regime Psyops. The Finn was given my critique of his hypotheses, by the owner of the site that has his nuclear scenario. There has been no word back from him to my knowledge, but I would still welcome this now.

Next I have written what may be the only full review of Tahil’s book here. And this should be read by all, after reading his book. Tahil deserves credit for analyzing the USGS dust/elements study, and concluding that fission likely occurred during the WTC destruction, and even afterwards with secondary fission on some of the samples. But then Tahil’s scenario entails one nuke per tower in the sub-basement again-- but here each one was a fission explosion that arose from making a large, hidden fission reactor explode like a nuclear bomb with upward focusing (as with the Finn). My review makes clear that several aspects are untenable or improbable. First, a nuclear reactor “going super-critical,” and exploding like a nuclear bomb is said to be physically impossible. Then the videoed, top-bottom tower destruction itself makes the one nuke per basement unlikely. Furthermore, my articles have also cited much eyewitness testimony such as from survivor sub-basement nuke survivor, Felipe David, and WTC Engineer Mike Pecoraro. Pecoraro was in a sub-basement level, and went UP a level to see that an earlier blast vaporized a 50 ton steel press and shriveled up a heavy concrete/steel door into foil-like matter. This implies a nuke went off above him, not below him, and so even if a fission reactor could be made to go off like a nuclear bomb (which is stated to be impossible), could the one reactor do this a second time after it would have had its first, chaotic nuclear explosion? So the actual destruction videos and eyewitness testimony further erode some of Tahil’s (and the Finn’s) hypotheses.

Finally, numerous crucial statements Tahil wrote are incorrect. His rationale for the massive hidden reactor hypothesis was two-fold. 1. He claims that a fission bomb uses up 100% of its fissile material, when the correct figure is only 1-6%! and 2. Massive amounts of Strontium and other elements found in the dust, he claims, could only mean that two massive fission reactors were already present. My review showed that Strontium occurs in concrete, sometimes not as a tiny component, but as a relatively large percentage, as is known for the concrete used in making the Empire State Building and the Pentagon. All this taken together make his two hidden, massive, reactors hypothesis either physically impossible (to go off as a bomb and/or to subsequently be re-used), unnecessary, or untenable. But again his work is most valuable for demonstrating the likelihood that fission occurred during WTC destruction, and that the China Syndrome resulted. I have had no communications from Tahil after my review and critique of his hypotheses. But I continue to welcome honest criticism of both my critiques of the other nuclear scenarios, and of my own hypotheses.

It is hoped that people will examine all the evidence (including survivors’ testimonies, EMP, massive heat, sound, radiation lowering methods used, photos, etc.), and the Physics I have outlined, and that are archived at these two blogs, http://wtcdemolition.blogspot.com and http://wtc-chinasyndrome.blogspot.com, and stop promoting misinformation or disinformation. I assert this includes the “red mercury” scam, the tritium red herring, and the latter’s implied fission-free pure fusion hangout as well as seeing how massive hidden underground reactors going off as nuclear bombs are improbable if not impossible-- and don’t fit the destruction evidence, and eyewitness testimony. They are not needed when you learn the aspects of my “many small nukes” hypothesis. If you are truly interested in what was perpetrated on 9/11, please read the ENTIRETY of the two blogs that contain my archived nuclear 9/11 articles, and make up your own mind. And if you want to see just how the Official Regime “explanation” for what occurred at the WTC on 9/11/01, (and some of the “alternative” non-nuclear theories) used bogus science and committed outright fraud, there are more articles on this at this site.

To sum up, all the evidence of the actual WTC destruction, and the great heat generated there for up to six months indicates that WTC destruction was most likely caused by numerous small nuclear fission bombs (micro-nukes), not by a single basement nuke, nor by massive hidden reactors that exploded like nuclear bombs. The China Syndrome Aftermath arose, and had to arise, because the fission fragments were contained in the buildings as they were nuked, and ended up all over the rubble pile, and beneath the towers and WTC7.

It’s time to promote, or at least publicly discuss, the continual efforts made by this Anonymous [American] Physicist to examine all the evidence of the nuking of the WTC, and the China Syndrome Aftermath in New York City. Please promote these works both on the net and to friends, family, and neighbors. It is ABSOLUTELY THE MOST CRUCIAL ASPECT OF 911 TRUTH, TO INFORM PEOPLE THAT THE AMERICAN REGIME NUKED ITS OWN MOST POPULOUS CITY, NYC, ON 9/11. If your favorite blog or website ignores-- or blocks-- this most crucial aspect, either post it yourself or tell all your friends, family, etc. And carefully examine the differences in the nuclear 911 hypotheses, and eliminate the impossible, the improbable, the untenable, or what the evidence indicated is incorrect; and promote what fits all the evidence, and is physically tenable-- many small fission nukes were used to destroy the WTC on 9/11/01, and the China Syndrome Aftermath resulted. And the radiation issue is also discussed here.

Please promote this, as there isn’t much time left before they pull away the wool from everyone’s eyes. It won’t be pleasant, and must be prevented. Life will not be worth living then. Remember Hiroshima. The survivors there were said to be envious of the dead. This may be what they have planned for all of us, with the American Regime being, as Rev. Martin Luther King said, “the greatest purveyor of evil in the world today.” Indeed, there is much evidence that the American regime nuked its own people at least once before 9/11/01, in the Port Chicago, California incident, as I detailed here. Thus the American regime remains the only regime that has nuked its own people, as well as others, and that fact would likely enrage the American people to act, as nothing else might.
======

911 - 35 Reasons for Many Small Fission Nukes at the WTC

35 Reasons for Many Small Fission Nukes at the WTC

1) heat generation at ground zero for six months (china syndrome)
2) inability to quench ground zero heat with water
3) red hot/molten steel at ground zero
4) missing core columns from ground zero (vaporized during destruction)
5) spreading of sand at ground zero consistent with attempts to limit radiation
6) washing of steel recovered from pile consistent with radiation decontamination
7) extreme security for ground zero steel shipments consistent with limiting access to radioactive steel
8) extreme security at ground zero, limiting exposure, view of devastation
9) extreme pulverization of WTC concrete into very fine particles
10) disappearance of over one thousand human bodies from WTC debris
11) disappearance of furniture, phones, filing cabinets and computers from WTC debris
12) disappearance of elevator doors, office doors, office cubicle walls, toilets and sinks from WTC debris
13) several floor fragments fused together in “meteorite” object
14) bone fragments sprayed into Bankers Trust upper floor during destruction
15) multiple blast waves during destruction of tower
16) large fireballs during initiation of WTC1 destruction
17) small backpack-sized fission nukes exist
18) fission-nuke technology well-established
19) low efficiency of fission nukes ensures leftover radioactive fragments and China syndrome
20) EMP formation during tower destruction (exploding cars, partial burning)
21) Description of heat in WTC blast cloud
22) Extensive cover-up of ground zero air by EPA
23) High rate of cancers, including thyroid cancer typically associated with radiation exposure, in ground zero responders
24) Melted, hanging skin in WTC survivor Felipe David in absence of fire
25) Vaporized press and crumpled steel door in WTC basement reported by Pecoraro
26) Steel beam bent in U, without cracking, evidence of extreme high temps
27) Steel beam bent in U has layer of molten metal on surface
28) Extreme overall devastation of two massive towers and blasted out Ground Zero aftermath
29) Appearance of fantastical, nonsensical DEW theory by likely govt agents-- uses evidence of nukes (EMP, extreme pulverization of tower into dust) but denies nukes at all costs
30) Appearance of fantastical, nonsensical thermite (super nano-thermite) theory by likely govt agents-- uses evidence of nukes (molten steel, china syndrome) but denies nukes at all costs
31) Small iron microspheres found by Jones et al in WTC dust— evidence of steel vaporization by high temps of nukes
32) Pyroclastic debris cloud during WTC destruction
33) Upwards jutting debris trails reminiscent of debris trails formed during underground nuke test
34) Small bright flashes during destruction of both towers
35) Extremely compacted ground zero debris

911 - The "Deep Mystery" of Melted Steel

The "Deep Mystery" of Melted Steel


 http://www.wpi.edu/News/Transformations/2002Spring/steel.html

There is no indication that any of the fires in the World Trade Center buildings were hot enough to melt the steel framework. Jonathan Barnett, professor of fire protection engineering, has repeatedly reminded the public that steel--which has a melting point of 2,800 degrees Fahrenheit--may weaken and bend, but does not melt during an ordinary office fire. Yet metallurgical studies on WTC steel brought back to WPI reveal that a novel phenomenon--called a eutectic reaction--occurred at the surface, causing intergranular melting capable of turning a solid steel girder into Swiss cheese.

Materials science professors Ronald R. Biederman and Richard D. Sisson Jr. confirmed the presence of eutectic formations by examining steel samples under optical and scanning electron microscopes. A preliminary report was published in JOM, the journal of the Minerals, Metals & Materials Society. A more detailed analysis comprises Appendix C of the FEMA report. The New York Times called these findings "perhaps the deepest mystery uncovered in the investigation." The significance of the work on a sample from Building 7 and a structural column from one of the twin towers becomes apparent only when one sees these heavy chunks of damaged metal.

A one-inch column has been reduced to half-inch thickness. Its edges--which are curled like a paper scroll--have been thinned to almost razor sharpness. Gaping holes--some larger than a silver dollar--let light shine through a formerly solid steel flange. This Swiss cheese appearance shocked all of the fire-wise professors, who expected to see distortion and bending--but not holes.

A eutectic compound is a mixture of two or more substances that melts at the lowest temperature of any mixture of its components. Blacksmiths took advantage of this property by welding over fires of sulfur-rich charcoal, which lowers the melting point of iron. In the World Trade Center fire, the presence of oxygen, sulfur and heat caused iron oxide and iron sulfide to form at the surface of structural steel members. This liquid slag corroded through intergranular channels into the body of the metal, causing severe erosion and a loss of structural integrity.

"The important questions," says Biederman, "are how much sulfur do you need, and where did it come from? The answer could be as simple--and this is scary- as acid rain."

Have environmental pollutants increased the potential for eutectic reactions? "We may have just the inherent conditions in the atmosphere so that a lot of water on a burning building will form sulfuric acid, hydrogen sulfide or hydroxides, and start the eutectic process as the steel heats up," Biederman says. He notes that the sulfur could also have come from contents of the burning buildings, such as rubber or plastics. Another possible culprit is ocean salts, such as sodium sulfate, which is known to catalyze sulfidation reactions on turbine blades of jet engines. "All of these things have to be explored," he says.

From a building-safety point of view, the critical question is: Did the eutectic mixture form before the buildings collapsed, or later, as the remains smoldered on the ground. "We have no idea," admits Sisson. "To answer that, we would need to recreate those fires in the FPE labs, and burn fresh steel of known composition for the right time period, with the right environment." He hopes to have the opportunity to collaborate on thermodynamically controlled studies, and to observe the effects of adding sulfur, copper and other elements. The most important lesson, Sisson and Biederman stress, is that fail-safe sprinkler systems are essential to prevent steel from reaching even 1,000 degrees Fahrenheit, because phase changes at the 1,300-degree mark compromise a structure's load-bearing capacity.

The FEMA report calls for further metallurgic investigations, and Barnett, Biederman and Sisson hope that WPI will obtain NIST funding and access to more samples. They are continuing their microscopic studies on the samples prepared by graduate student Jeremy Bernier and Marco Fontecchio, the 2001–02 Helen E. Stoddard Materials Science and Engineering Fellow. (Next year's Stoddard Fellow, Erin Sullivan, will take up this work as part of her graduate studies.) Publication of their results may clear up some mysteries that have confounded the scientific community.
=======

...after the fall

 

The collapse of the World Trade Center towers left thousands dead and a mountain of debris to clean up. For engineers, it also left behind a troubling mystery: what caused two of the world's tallest steel-framed building to fall? Jonathan Barnett '74 and a team of researchers from WPI played a central role in helping to find the answers . . .
Professor Jonathan Barnett is an expert in structural and fire protection engineering, whose research has focused on building performance in fires and failure analysis. But that expertise didn't prepare him for the images that flashed across his television screen on Sept. 11, 2001.
He knew that the world had never seen the collapse of a protected steel-framed building. And yet, there were two of the world's tallest steel-framed towers crumbling into piles of rubble. Barnett's extensive research left him uniquely qualified to understand what was happening inside the blazing structures from the moment they were struck by speeding jetliners to the horrifying seconds when they dropped onto the streets of lower Manhattan, but, in truth, he was as surprised as anyone.
In the days following the terrorist attacks, the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), in cooperation with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), began assembling a "dream team" of engineers to investigate the causes of the destruction, not only of the main towers of the Trade Center, but of Building 7, the 47-story structure that collapsed in flames seven hours after the loss of the towers, and of Buildings 3, 4 and 5, which suffered extensive damage and partial collapse as a result of fire and impacts from falling debris.
Barnett was approached early on, but was unprepared when his cell phone rang on Oct. 5, in the middle of a meeting, summoning him to join the World Trade Center Building Performance Assessment Team (BPAT) in New York City the next day for a week of fieldwork. "It was 5 o'clock on a Friday," Barnett recalls, "and I had no steel-toed boots."
Not one to let a pair of boots stand between him and the professional service opportunity of a lifetime, he scoured the attic of the Auburn Fire Department and found a usable pair. The next day he met up with the 24 other team members--the country's foremost structural, seismic and fire protection engineers. One was an alumnus, Christopher Marrion, who holds a master's degree in fire protection engineering from WPI. (See Marrion at the Controls)
Barnett's credentials to serve as one of the two BPAT core members in fire protection engineering include three WPI engineering degrees (his master's thesis in civil engineering focused on seismic design of buildings; his doctoral dissertation in mechanical engineering, completed before WPI began granting Ph.D.s in FPE, explored the effect of fire on steel structures). Barnett joined WPI in 1979 as the first assistant director of the Center for Firesafety Studies, and in 1989 became a tenure-track assistant professor in the discipline he helped create. Today he is a full professor of fire protection engineering and co-founder and co-director of the Melbourne (Australia) Project Center.

At Ground Zero, almost a month after the attacks, the stench of destruction and death was still strong. Across the bay at the Fresh Kills Landfill on Staten Island, recovery teams were at work screening debris down to a quarter of an inch--the size of the smallest human bone. "As an engineer," Barnett says, "you tell yourself, OK, I have to be professional, I have to take notes, I have to ignore the death around me. At the same time, as a human being, that's not easy to do."
Team members toured what was left of the 16-acre World Trade Center Plaza, interviewed officials and eyewitnesses, and examined remnants of fallen structures at the Staten Island landfill and at salvage yards. Steel samples were cut and cataloged for further study, and some were taken back to WPI for analysis (see The "Deep Mystery" of Melted Steel).
Besides asbestos dust and bio-contamination, the investigators faced physical dangers in the unstable buildings. On a walk-through of Building 5, Barnett's group noticed that the floor slab beneath them was severed. When they checked from below, they discovered that they had been standing on unsupported rubble. Later, while taking measurements in the building's subterranean parking garage, the roof started to collapse, and they fled to safety.
In addition to his work at Ground Zero, Barnett drove to the Fresh Kills Landfill with teammates Marrion, Venkatesh Kodur and Saw-Teen See (wife of the towers' designer, Leslie E. Roberston, and a partner in Robertson's firm) to see the steel recovered from the Trade Center. After showing his pass to the guard at the gatehouse, Barnett was directed to the appropriate area, where he parked his two-week-old Acura.
"I've been to landfills," he says, "and this one didn't smell right to me." Knowing that the rubble brought to the site contained human remains, he quickly urged See back into the car, and when Marrion and Kodur resisted, Barnett insisted that he was getting his car and his teammates out of there, right away. As they closed the doors, a dozen workers in full Tyvek biohazard gear walked by. "See that?" said Barnett, feeling vindicated. "I think maybe we're underdressed for the occasion."
He drove to New Jersey as quickly as he could. "We took out the floor mats and wiped them on the grass, and we all wiped our feet. Then we took the car to a carwash."
Despite the grim nature of its task, the BPAT members were warmly welcomed. Barnett was thanked by strangers in the street, and ushered to a seat on a packed subway car when his ID badge slipped out from under his shirt. At the upscale Tribeca Grille, the grimy engineers, still in their work clothes, were escorted to a center table, once the maitre d' learned who they were.
"New Yorkers were just so friendly and willing to support our efforts in any way they could, even if it was just with a smile," Barnett says.
Barnett, at left, with other members of the building performance team at the Fresh Kills Landfill, were piles of steel from the World Trade Center towers were stored.
The complex science of fire modeling can be reduced to two questions: "How hot?" and "Where?"
Those were the questions facing Barnett and his team back at WPI when he returned to campus to begin analysis of the data--which included two cartons of videotapes, thousands of photographs and detailed construction documents. While other members of the BPAT looked at seismic data, emergency response and evacuation, Barnett simulated the fires, focusing on the floors of impact.
"To understand the collapse, we needed to know how the structural elements of the towers stood up to the stresses inflicted on the morning of Sept. 11," explains doctoral candidate James A. (Jay) Ierardi '97 ('99 M.S.), who previously worked with Barnett on the analysis of the 1999 Worcester Cold Storage warehouse fire. As the FEMA report indicates, the twin towers withstood the mechanical insult of the planes' impact, but were then subjected to interior fires, with temperatures ranging from 200 to 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit.
The WTC fires were remarkable in two ways: first, for their sheer size, and second, for the fact that such a large area was ignited instantaneously. (Typical office fires start small and spread slowly, Ierardi says.) The towers were penetrated by planes canted at a 30-degree angle and a 45-degree angle, which immediately set four or five floors--each about an acre in area--ablaze. Barnett compares the jet fuel that doused those floors and flowed down elevator shafts to charcoal lighter fluid. With rapid flashover on so many floors, sprinkler pressure would have been inadequate, even if the water supply lines had not been severed by the aircraft. Ierardi speculates that the hijackers knowingly calculated the angle of their hits to overwhelm the buildings' fire-suppression mechanisms.
To compute the size of the fires, Barnett needed to know how much oxygen was available to burn the 10,000-gallon fuel load in each 767. His calculations included the enormous holes ripped open by the planes, and the dimensions and location of every window, stairwell, and elevator or utility shaft. He also plotted the layout of offices, the location of partitions and furnishings, and flammability specification of the building materials, furnishings and other contents.
To determine which windows were open during the fire, Barnett examined more than 120 hours of videotape to see where smoke was venting. WPI undergraduates pitched in, taking home tapes to screen over the Thanksgiving break. One of these students was Patrick T. Spencer '05, son of fallen firefighter Thomas E. Spencer; Patrick came to WPI on a scholarship set up for children of victims of the Worcester warehouse fire. Ironically, he was the one who first informed Barnett of the terrorist strikes on the morning of Sept. 11. Graduate students in Barnett's failure analysis class helped calculate how much jet fuel the initial fireballs consumed.
To quantify and compute all of these variables in such a large, complex space-- a space that no longer exists-- is a mammoth task that requires painstaking research and a certain amount of informed speculation. The size and complexity of the problem challenged even WPI's fastest computers. Barnett says it took one week to simulate 10 minutes' worth of the fire. During the three weeks of report writing, only 40 minutes of the fire event could be modeled. The complete simulations won't be available until fall.
Barnett estimates that on top of his academic and civic activities, he's put more than 600 hours into the BPAT investigation. In the months between the October fieldwork and the May 1 release of the FEMA report, he made one or two trips per week, sometimes flying back and forth between WPI and Washington in a single day to teach classes and attend meetings.
He is the lead author on the section of the report that describes the metallurgy work done by WPI professors Ronald Biederman and Richard Sisson, as well as the chapters about Buildings 4, 5 and 6. He is a co-author on the chapters about the collapse of Buildings 1 and 2 (the twin towers). "I think the most important outcome of the FEMA report is that we've identified areas that need to be studied," Barnett says. "Before you spend millions of dollars [on further investigations], you need to know what to spend it on."
A bigger budget, more time and earlier access to the scrap yards, where steel was being cut up and sold, would have enhanced the investigation, he says. "You do the best you can, with the available resources. I think we did a very credible job." Efforts are under way to address factors that hindered FEMA's BPAT investigation. The proposed "National Construction Safety Team Act of 2002" outlines procedures to ensure that evidence is preserved in the event of another attack of this magnitude.
In interviews, Barnett has repeatedly stressed that the public does not need to worry about living and working in high-rise buildings. "Our buildings are generally safe," he reiterates. "If we were doing things that were unsafe, then periodically we would have had failures. In fact, I would suggest, because we've never had failures, we probably over-design."
On May 1, Barnett accompanied BPAT leader Gene Corely to Washington to respond to questions as Corley presented the team's findings to Congress. FEMA has proposed a $16-million, multiyear follow-up investigation, to be headed by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). Two areas earmarked in the FEMA report for further study are the metallurgical examinations performed by Biederman and Sisson, and the fire modeling computations done by Barnett. WPI hopes to obtain NIST funding to pursue these investigations. The report also calls for further examination of the building and fire codes, but recommends against considering aircraft impact as a design parameter for every structure. "I think the lessons for ordinary buildings are few and far between," says Barnett.
The terrorist attacks and their aftermath highlight the importance of fire protection engineering as a discipline, and the need for closer ties with the field of structural engineering, Barnett says. The FEMA report specifically recommends cross training between the disciplines, to ensure that the impact of fire is adequately addressed in the design process.
Barnett says he is grateful to have had the chance to participate in an important national study, working with a team of professionals to tackle questions that are important to his profession and the country (and that provide a real-world case study to bring into the classroom). "In my career," he says, "I've never had the privilege of working with so many awesome practitioners."
 ===========